Not sure it buys us much. We'd be adding a whole bunch of .s files, but still have to have the special targets in makefile, since compiled differently.
I guess it would simplify process.s/process.c some. Is inline assembly universally available? I wonder if we could make them all process.SYSNAME.c? Then should be able to make a single rule for compiling all of the pieces. -- Nathan On Wed, 2002-10-16 at 10:58, Jim Rees wrote: > Here is something I'd like to see done. Split up lwp/process.s into a bunch > of separate sysname files. We've already got process.s.hpux and > process.fbsd.s (which is actually redundant). > > Maybe Nathan would be willing to tackle this. > _______________________________________________ > OpenAFS-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Nathan Neulinger EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] University of Missouri - Rolla Phone: (573) 341-4841 Computing Services Fax: (573) 341-4216 _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
